A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

blinded by light



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old October 1st 19, 11:33 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
jOHN b.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,421
Default blinded by light

On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 15:58:42 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 9/30/2019 9:16 PM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 09:30:18 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On Monday, September 30, 2019 at 10:11:05 AM UTC-4, duane wrote:
Here lights are required at
night. There's no specification except one white in front and one red
behind.

I think the NHTSA codes and most U.S. state codes say the bike lights must be
visible from 500 feet. It's true that's a pretty vague spec. Visible under what
conditions? Total darkness or surrounded by city glare? And it's high time we
had upper limits, as well.

- Frank Krygowski


Visible from a stated distance is a fairly standard specification.
Marine navigation lights have used this standard for more than a
hundred years.


I think it makes more sense in a marine environment. There's rarely
enough bright surrounding light to cause an observer's pupils to stop down.


I suspect that the "standard" exists is because it was first set more
than a hundred years ago when there was no other method of specifying
brightness.

I also suspect that as a vessel is required to keep a lookout and the
excuse of "Ohhh I didn't see him" would in most cases simply pin the
blame onto the party that said it that light brightness is probably
not a major factor in vessel to vessel collisions.
--
cheers,

John B.

Ads
  #62  
Old October 2nd 19, 12:23 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
JBeattie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,870
Default blinded by light

On Tuesday, October 1, 2019 at 1:07:31 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 10/1/2019 2:54 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 9/30/2019 8:52 PM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 06:00:24 -0700, Jeff Liebermann

wrote:

On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 13:26:05 +0700, John B.
wrote:

The problems with all the modern, marvelous, systems is,
"sometimes
they don't work".

True. However, no system works 100% of the time in 100%
of all
possible (contrived) situations. A bicycle that is quite
suitable for
riding on pavement would probably do badly in dirt, mud,
rain, etc.
One has to design for either a specific situation, or as
in this case,
the greatest number of reasonable situations, and rely on
the
intelligence of the operator to know when to disarm the
monster. It
is impossible to design out clueless operators because we
continue to
produce better clueless operators.

As the driver who appeared sound asleep in his self driven
car
(recently highlighted here) demonstrates , "rely on the
intelligence of the operator" may not be the best path to
take.

In fact, as I think Frank will testify, industrial safety
is largely
concerned with eliminating "reliance on the intelligence
of the
operator" :-)


I think it's worse than that. Industrial safety nowadays has
to prevent deliberate suicide if it's at all possible to do
so. As in "He crawled under the barrier on his belly and
stood in front of the robot so it would stab him to death.
That's the company's fault."



With a mind like that you might consider a second career as
plaintiff's attorney.


Hmmm. Just won that appeal, sort of. https://law.justia.com/cases/oregon/...9/a165903.html That case was about the alleged failure of a psychiatrist and a social worker to prevent a patient from killing herself -- with a gun, which is an unusual suicide mode for a woman.

When people want to kill themselves, they do -- and it doesn't matter how many hotlines you give them to call. In Oregon, however, a suicidal person can be at fault in failing to follow suicide prevention strategies.

-- Jay Beattie.
  #63  
Old October 2nd 19, 12:46 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
jOHN b.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,421
Default blinded by light

On Tue, 01 Oct 2019 15:18:18 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

On Tue, 01 Oct 2019 08:14:17 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

Which brings us back to Chalo's comment form years ago on
RBT that auto steering wheels ought to have a pointy spike
in the center.


It won't work. Drivers will become accustomed and immunized against
the threat of being impaled after a few months of driving without any
fatal incidents. You can't convince someone by merely repeating a
threat over and over on a daily basis with nothing happening. It's
much like Chicken Little warning everyone constantly that the sky is
falling until everyone is so tired of hearing the warning that they
ignore it when the problem becomes real. Same with the spike. The
driver that impales himself on the steering wheel will probably act
surprised and announce "Gee, it's never done that before".

If you want a lasting effect, you have to hit the driver with a single
spectacular blow that will leave a lasting impression of fear, and not
a continuous irritation. Driver training tries to do that by showing
movies of mangled accident victims. The military does the same by
showing movies of battlefield carnage. I did the same thing to
several pre-teens caught smoking by giving them a tour of the local
hospital oncology ward and having the lung cancer and emphysema
victims terrorize the kids from their hospital beds. The production
manager at a former employer made it clear that the machines were
dangerous by inserting a sausage into the crimper and waving around
the results. (Unfortunately, he ruined the effect by munching on the
remains of the sausage).

Maybe if prospective bicycle buyers were required to negotiate and
survive 30 minutes of downtown traffic, complete with simulated
injuries and fatalities, before a store is allowed to sell them a
bicycle, we might see a better class of cyclists. Same for car
drivers.


Or simply stop referring to highway crashes as "accidents". Determine
who is at fault and punish them.

I hate to keep referring to Thailand but here if a car hits a bicycle
the car is deemed, subject to evidence to the contrary, to be in the
wrong and is then responsible for all costs involved ranging from
replacement of the bicycle to the funeral costs and a suitable
compensation paid to the cyclist's family.

In addition if a motor vehicle hits a bicycle and the cyclist is
killed the charge can be "causing death by dangerous driving" which
can result in a 10 year prison sentence

Perhaps being penalized, either financially or by incarceration, for
running over bicycles would make a difference.

It might be noted that when severe penalties are to be inflected as a
penalty extensive investigation is usually required to determine who
is fundamentally at fault, which cold penalize wrong doing bicyclists.
--
cheers,

John B.

  #64  
Old October 2nd 19, 02:45 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,538
Default blinded by light

On 10/1/2019 4:07 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 10/1/2019 2:54 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 9/30/2019 8:52 PM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 06:00:24 -0700, Jeff Liebermann

wrote:

On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 13:26:05 +0700, John B.
wrote:

The problems with all the modern, marvelous, systems is,
"sometimes
they don't work".

True.Â* However, no system works 100% of the time in 100%
of all
possible (contrived) situations.Â* A bicycle that is quite
suitable for
riding on pavement would probably do badly in dirt, mud,
rain, etc.
One has to design for either a specific situation, or as
in this case,
the greatest number of reasonable situations, and rely on
the
intelligence of the operator to know when to disarm the
monster.Â* It
is impossible to design out clueless operators because we
continue to
produce better clueless operators.

As the driver who appeared sound asleep in his self driven
car
(recently highlighted here) demonstrates , "rely on the
intelligence of the operator" may not be the best path to
take.

In fact, as I think Frank will testify, industrial safety
is largely
concerned with eliminating "reliance on the intelligence
of the
operator" :-)


I think it's worse than that. Industrial safety nowadays has
to prevent deliberate suicide if it's at all possible to do
so. As in "He crawled under the barrier on his belly and
stood in front of the robot so it would stab him to death.
That's the company's fault."



With a mind like that you might consider a second career as plaintiff's
attorney.


Not me. I was more interested (although grudgingly) in how to design the
barriers to make that impossible.

BTW, the incident that inspired that post wasn't actually a suicide,
AFAIK. Instead it was a super-cocky young engineer who thought he knew
better than all the system designers.

And he didn't crawl under the barrier. Instead he lay down on his back
on a parts conveyor to get carried into the workcell without shutting it
down. Still, when he cleared the sensor problem that had stopped the
robot, it did go right through him.


--
- Frank Krygowski
  #65  
Old October 2nd 19, 09:34 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Tosspot[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,563
Default blinded by light

On 30/09/2019 14.54, jbeattie wrote:

snip

I also see a lot of DRL "good luck" rear blinkies -- the sort of
thing you would get free for your kid to wear trick-or-treating. Why
bother.


I've been using relights for 6 months now in a fit and forget mode.
I've only had rear lights fail a few times due to water ingress, or
cable issues, so I see the reelight not as an alternative to proper
lights, but an always on(for a given value of) flash and hope until you
notice the main rear light is defunct for some reason.

Super-bright front flashers should be outlawed, but then only outlaws
will have bright flashers.


Can't you just shoot people in America if you consider threatened?
  #66  
Old October 2nd 19, 09:39 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Tosspot[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,563
Default blinded by light

On 30/09/2019 16.46, AMuzi wrote:
On 9/30/2019 9:11 AM, Duane wrote:
On 30/09/2019 9:54 a.m., jbeattie wrote:
On Monday, September 30, 2019 at 6:18:46 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 9/29/2019 11:03 PM, David Scheidt wrote:
Jeff Liebermann wrote: :On Sat, 28 Sep
2019 03:06:49 +0000 (UTC), David Scheidt
wrote:

:I got blinded by a bike light this afternoon.

:Blinded during afternoon daylight hours? I could see that
happening :at night, but not during daylight hours. Have
you recovered from the :blinding light?

During the day, gray and rainy.

:Some stupidly bright flashing thing, poorly aimed.

:Probably someone doing weapons research. Megalumen lights
will robably be prominent in the next inevitable war.

:How do I know it was poorly aimed? I was inside. At my
desk. On the :second floor. Looking 90 degrees away from
the direction the bike was :traveling.

:If it was a headlight, 90 degree side illumination suggests
it may :have had 180 degree beamwidth. Impressive for a
bicycle light.

My desk is at the corner of the building. I stand facing out
a east window, and have southern ones immediately to my
right. The biker was in the alley on the block south, heading
towards me. The light was annoying me (flahs, flash, flash,
SUPER FLASH, flash...), and turned to see what it was, which
is when I really was blinded. If I'd been driving a car down
the alley, I'd have run the guy and his pinarello over.

:Assuming your description is accurate, my guess(tm) would be
a poorly :secured headlight that had rotated itself to one
side. Further, I :suspect that the rider was not familiar
with the operation of a day :time blinky "safety" headlight.
Perhaps the bicycle was stolen, he :was making a hasty
escape, and he did not have time to adjust and :secure the
headlight?


:http://www.learnbydestroying.com/jeffl/pics/bicycles/slides/bicycle-flashlight.html



:It's difficult to be certain, but I suspect that this was a
unique and :unusual occurrence, which is unlikely to be
repeated in the near :future.

Dude lives on that block (or at least, he keeps his
collection of bikes there). I expect I'll see him and the
light again.




A brief survey of bikes in for service shows some large number
of tail lights pointing at the pavement and a lesser but
significant number of head lamps directed at outer space.



Tail lights don't have much directionality except for the designs
with the built in bike paths.
https://ride.lezyne.com/collections/...1-led-23r-v104




The popular move these days is multiple tail lights -- which is
O.K. unless you're riding behind the person. I have a single
pulsing rear light which is a nice compromise. You stand out as
a bicycle without blinding anyone. My bike also has a bunch of
reflective tape, and if I'm really concerned, I'll wear my
reflective shoe covers. Those things are really noticeable -- but
just so-so keeping my feet dry.

I also see a lot of DRL "good luck" rear blinkies -- the sort of
thing you would get free for your kid to wear trick-or-treating.
Why bother.


Maybe it's just to comply with the law. Here lights are required
at night. There's no specification except one white in front and
one red behind. They've recently added that blinkies are allowed.
BTW, there's no real specification as to what constitutes night
either. I have decent lights for night riding though I don't do
that much. I have some pretty decent ones that I keep on the bike
in case of a rainy commute or when I commute this time of year.

I use some reflective tape because unlike lights, reflectors are
mandatory at all times. Since I don't have pedals I can put tape
on my shoes. For wheels it's even better. You can use tape on the
wheel but it has to cover the full circumference of the wheel. My
HED wheels have reflective labels but they aren't compliant because
there are spaces on the rim with no label. But we are allowed to
substitute reflective tape on the seat stays or fork. Now how
does that make sense? The cops at our club's info session told us
it would be useful if the clowns making the laws actually saw a
bicycle but no matter, we have to comply to avoid the fines. The
fines are 65 bucks per missing reflector so I put the tape on. I
don't see much use for reflectors in daylight anyway.


Super-bright front flashers should be outlawed, but then only
outlaws will have bright flashers.


BTW, there's no real specification as to what constitutes night
either.


I could not find it for Quebec but in USA the legal concept is well
defined ['civil twilight'] as it affects various activities and
obligations from firearm use to auto lights to watercraft.


Critically it effects aviation and maritime operations. You have
astronomical, civil and nautical. Good article here;

https://www.timeanddate.com/astronom...-twilight.html
  #67  
Old October 2nd 19, 09:40 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
jOHN b.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,421
Default blinded by light

On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 09:34:19 +0100, Tosspot
wrote:

On 30/09/2019 14.54, jbeattie wrote:

snip

I also see a lot of DRL "good luck" rear blinkies -- the sort of
thing you would get free for your kid to wear trick-or-treating. Why
bother.


I've been using relights for 6 months now in a fit and forget mode.
I've only had rear lights fail a few times due to water ingress, or
cable issues, so I see the reelight not as an alternative to proper
lights, but an always on(for a given value of) flash and hope until you
notice the main rear light is defunct for some reason.


How noticeable are the relights, say from 50 meters away?
I've been using a flashing red tail light for some time that is quite
noticeable but of course you need to charge the battery once in a
while :-(


Super-bright front flashers should be outlawed, but then only outlaws
will have bright flashers.


Can't you just shoot people in America if you consider threatened?

--
cheers,

John B.

  #68  
Old October 2nd 19, 01:03 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Tosspot[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,563
Default blinded by light

On 02/10/2019 09.40, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 09:34:19 +0100, Tosspot
wrote:

On 30/09/2019 14.54, jbeattie wrote:

snip

I also see a lot of DRL "good luck" rear blinkies -- the sort of
thing you would get free for your kid to wear trick-or-treating. Why
bother.


I've been using relights for 6 months now in a fit and forget mode.
I've only had rear lights fail a few times due to water ingress, or
cable issues, so I see the reelight not as an alternative to proper
lights, but an always on(for a given value of) flash and hope until you
notice the main rear light is defunct for some reason.


How noticeable are the relights, say from 50 meters away?
I've been using a flashing red tail light for some time that is quite
noticeable but of course you need to charge the battery once in a
while :-(


The ones I've seen, very. They also have quite a field of vision. The
startup is interesting, they flash about 1 Hz for a minute of two, then
get up to 2 Hz, then seem to settle on about 3 after 5 minutes.

Can't really say much more, if it's still working in a couple of years
it will be worth it. If not, a Pox on the lot of 'em!

  #69  
Old October 2nd 19, 04:34 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Tom Kunich[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,231
Default blinded by light

On Tuesday, October 1, 2019 at 6:45:34 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 10/1/2019 4:07 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 10/1/2019 2:54 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 9/30/2019 8:52 PM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 06:00:24 -0700, Jeff Liebermann

wrote:

On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 13:26:05 +0700, John B.
wrote:

The problems with all the modern, marvelous, systems is,
"sometimes
they don't work".

True.Â* However, no system works 100% of the time in 100%
of all
possible (contrived) situations.Â* A bicycle that is quite
suitable for
riding on pavement would probably do badly in dirt, mud,
rain, etc.
One has to design for either a specific situation, or as
in this case,
the greatest number of reasonable situations, and rely on
the
intelligence of the operator to know when to disarm the
monster.Â* It
is impossible to design out clueless operators because we
continue to
produce better clueless operators.

As the driver who appeared sound asleep in his self driven
car
(recently highlighted here) demonstrates , "rely on the
intelligence of the operator" may not be the best path to
take.

In fact, as I think Frank will testify, industrial safety
is largely
concerned with eliminating "reliance on the intelligence
of the
operator" :-)

I think it's worse than that. Industrial safety nowadays has
to prevent deliberate suicide if it's at all possible to do
so. As in "He crawled under the barrier on his belly and
stood in front of the robot so it would stab him to death.
That's the company's fault."



With a mind like that you might consider a second career as plaintiff's
attorney.


Not me. I was more interested (although grudgingly) in how to design the
barriers to make that impossible.

BTW, the incident that inspired that post wasn't actually a suicide,
AFAIK. Instead it was a super-cocky young engineer who thought he knew
better than all the system designers.

And he didn't crawl under the barrier. Instead he lay down on his back
on a parts conveyor to get carried into the workcell without shutting it
down. Still, when he cleared the sensor problem that had stopped the
robot, it did go right through him.


--
- Frank Krygowski


Recently in China and entire large bridge collapsed into the river below it and killed people living in boats beneath. What would you care to bet that it wasn't built by the same company that won the Oakland span of the bay bridge from an American contractor? Every single piece of steel in the present bridge has been shown to be FAR below standards. Every support connection has broken before the bridge even opened and an American firm has redesigned it to have sliders on it so that supposedly the bridge would be able to slide back and forth supported by the suspension wires which have since been found not to have been properly sealed and which are now rusting.

This must be why you think that the Democrats who run California are so intelligent.
  #70  
Old October 2nd 19, 05:03 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,538
Default blinded by light

On 10/2/2019 4:40 AM, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 09:34:19 +0100, Tosspot
wrote:

I've been using relights for 6 months now in a fit and forget mode.
I've only had rear lights fail a few times due to water ingress, or
cable issues, so I see the reelight not as an alternative to proper
lights, but an always on(for a given value of) flash and hope until you
notice the main rear light is defunct for some reason.


How noticeable are the relights, say from 50 meters away?
I've been using a flashing red tail light for some time that is quite
noticeable but of course you need to charge the battery once in a
while :-(

We were in Amsterdam about a year ago and came across a fair number of
Reelights. The ones I saw were very unimpressive. I'd describe their
output as a twinkle rather than a flash. In total darkness, I suppose
they would be noticeable, but among the city lights and car lights, they
were far from attention getting. In daylight I can't imagine they made
any difference - which is one reason I'm very skeptical of the
Reelight-funded "study" that found DRLs to be so magically wonderful.

Now, LED efficiency has been increasing, and I suppose the LEDs fitted
to Reelights have improved. There's no way of knowing what generation of
Reelights I observed.

But I don't see any particular advantage of a Reelight over (say) a more
standard dynamo setup.

BTW, speaking of LED improvements: It's too bad that manufacturers of
LED headlights haven't settled on a standard configuration of
replaceable LEDs, similar to the standard configuration of halogen
bulbs. If they had, one could increase the lumen output of a good LED
headlamp without destroying its optical design.

I know the manufacturers have no financial incentive for doing that. But
from a user's perspective, it would have been nice.

--
- Frank Krygowski
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Blinded James[_8_] Techniques 59 September 12th 15 11:29 PM
Blinded by the light. James[_8_] Techniques 1 November 26th 13 05:27 AM
Cyclist blinded by egg. Simon Mason UK 52 October 26th 05 04:09 PM
Ever blinded by your helmet? B Paton Social Issues 27 November 16th 04 11:03 PM
Blinded by the light elyob UK 301 October 4th 03 05:34 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:15 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.